On Wed, 2023-07-12 at 09:25 -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote: > On Wed, 2023-07-12 at 00:34 +0000, Quinn Tran wrote: > > Hello Nilesh and Marvell > > > > Any chance to get comments/eyes on this please. > > Given its causing system crashes we need to decide how best to deal > > with it. > > > > QT: Laurence, > > In understanding the severity, Does end customer uses > > sg_write_same > > as the mechanism to move data? > > Other than the sg_write_same utility, how common is end customer > > uses > > 32Byte CDB? It seems like upper layer doesn't have support for > > 32Bytes CDB at this time. > > > > The code path you're modifying is for the T10-PI disk. This disk > > is > > "non-T10-PI" where it may create some confusion for next reader n > > Martin on why we've wander down this code path. > > > > Will queue up a patch that plug this hole. > > > > > > > > OK, Thank you > In this case the customer was specifically using sg_write_same. I am > not sure if it was part of a script or some other use case. > They were of the opinion it was severe enough of an issue to warrant > fixing so they logged a case with us. > Thanks for looking into this. > > Regards > Laurence Hello QT Did I miss an update to this. Was another fix sent. We need to deal with this at Red Hat as soon as possible please. Regards Laurence
